DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE S ROZAKIS, VAJIĆ AND BOTOUCHAROVA

We have voted against the finding of a violation in the present case in spite of the procedural imbroglio that led to delays in the proceedings. The reasons for which we depart from the position of the majority are the following:

a) Although admittedly a number of delays detected in the domestic proceedings were attributable to the national authorities, still the applicant contributed to some of them, in particular by not appearing at several hearings.

b) The dispute before the domestic tribunals arose as a result of a request made by a dealer who had assisted the applicant in buying a piece of property claiming the recovery from the applicant of a debt amounting to USD 1,000. In view of the nature of the subject-matter of these proceedings we believe that the applicant has not suffered any particular stress due to their protracted character.

Taking all these elements together, as well as the outcome of the proceedings, we cannot reach the conclusion that there has been a violation of the Convention in the present case.